1. Recognition of the Nature of Hebrew Poetry
Antiquity throws little light
upon the nature of Hebrew poetry. Josephus and
some of the fathers incidentally spoke
of metrical form; and medieval rabbis
adduced the "parallelism of mem
bers" as characteristic, but viewed the
subject from
a rhetorical or exegetical
point of view (Ibn Ezra on
Ps. ii.
3;
Isa. xiv. 11,);
for others, however,
Biblical poetry had so little attraction that they,
like Judah-ha-Levi, considered that Old Testament
poetry excelled all other just because
it lacked
artistic form. During and after the Reformation
exegetes were concerned only with the religious
content of the Old Testament, and it was not until
after the reaction against orthodoxy set in that
literary characteristics received attention. In 1753
appeared Bishop Lowth's still authoritative De
sacra poesi Hebrceorum (Eng. transl., Lectures on
the Sacred ,Poetry of the Hebrews, 2 vols., London,
1787), in which he treated (1) the meter, (2) "the
parabolic style," (3) the different kinds of
poetry.
Of great importance is the nineteenth lecture on
the parallelism of members, which parallelism he
divides into synonymous (Pa. cxiv. 1 sqq.) antithetic (Prov. xxvii: 6-7), and synthetic (Pa. xix.
8-11). To this work Herder furnished an excellent
supplement in Vom Geist der ebrtiischen Poesie
(2 vols., Dessau, 1782-83, Engt transl., The Spirit
of Hebrew Poetry, Burlington, Vt., 1833). With
few exceptions, mainly purely metrical questions,
the topics included in this branch of Old Testament study have been avoided by modern exegetes.
With full justification Kuenen has denied Keil's
contention that Hebrew poetry is the fruit of religion, and that therefore the Hebrews never had any
secular poetry. Keil overlooked, on the one hand,
that it was in the interest of religion that the compilers of the Old Testament selected as its contents
what seemed most important to them and no doubt
also to humanity; and, on the other hand, that the
Old Testament still contains many
z. Employ- traces of non-religious poetry. That
meat of song and poem had an important place
Poetry in the life of old Israel is seen from
by He- the facts that historians referred to old
brews. songs, and that prophets adopted their
form. It is provable that in all con
ditions of life the
song or the chant was heard-at
the wedding
(Jer. vii. 34, xxv. 10;
I Macc. ix. 39),
even that of a king (Pa. xlv.); lovers broke into song
(Isa. v. 1-2;
Ezek. xxxiii. 32).
The people sang in
the harvest-field (Pa. 'lxv. 13), at the wine-press
(Isa. xvi. 10;
Jer. xxv. 30),
at the discovery of
water (Num. xxi.17 sq.), and at the feast (Isa. v.12;
Ps. lxig. 12). Occasionally at the feast a host im
provised the song
(Amos vi.
5)
or-the riddle
(Judges xiv. 12),
but usually singer and songstress were
engaged to entertain the guests
(II Sam. xix. 35;
I Kings x. 12;
Eccles. ii. 8;
compare also David's
position at Saul's court). Everywhere vocal music
is the expression of joy; so closely are they related
that the bard seems to be out of place
in the atmos
phere of gloom
(Amos viii. 10;
Job xxi. 12;
Prov. xxv. 20).
Nevertheless, death, too, called forth its
own peculiar form of poetry; the "Lament,"
sung
by trained mourning women
(Jer. ix. 17
sqq.; cf.
Amos v. 16)
no doubt in a stereotyped form. If the
deceased was a king or a hero, real poets composed
new laments
(II Sam. i. 19 sqq., iii. 33
sq.;
II Chron. xxxv. 25).
The sacrifice of the virgin
daughter of Jephthah was annually commemorated
in elegies (Judges id. 40); the warriors called to
one
another in rhythmic shouts (I . Sam. xviii. 7,
xxi. 11, xxix. 5;
Judges v. 29);
on his return the
conqueror either himself sang his exploits
(Gen. iv. 23;
Judges xv. 16),
or employed a poet, whose
songs, like that of Deborah, became the sources for
the historian (cf.
Num. xxi. 14,
t;
Josh. x. 12-13
Judges v. 11). Satire, too, was clothed in poetry
(Judges v. 15-17;
Hab. ii. 6
sqq.;
Jer. vii. 29;
Ezek. xix. 1, xxvi. 17);
proverbs and parables were
given in poetic measure
(Judges ix. 7
sqq.;
II Kings xiv. 9
sqq.;
II Sam. xii. 1 sqq., xiv. 6
sqq.), which
was adopted by the prophets (Iaa. v. 1, sqq.,
xxviii. 23 sqq.;
Ezek. xvii. 2
sqq.) and the teacher
(Proverbs and Ecclesiastes), and in the practise of
it Solomon was considered chief
(I Kings v. 12).
How valuable the Israelites themselves considered
their
poetry is evinced by the many collections
which were made; thus, one containing dirges is
mentioned
II Chron. xxxv. 25;
there are also the
older "Book of the wars of Yahweh"
(Num. xxi. 14-15)
and the " Book of Jasher " (perhaps " The
Book of the Upright," Joshua x. 12-13.).
The Old Testament teaches, however, that poetry
found its highest development in the sphere of
religion; song, music, and the dance
3. Religious were always the indispensable form of
Use of the cult (Ex. xxxii.18;
Judges xxi. 21;
Poetry.
II Sam. vi. 5, 14);
a very old song,
with which the ark was greeted, is
preserved in
Num. x. 35-36;
at the Ephraimitic
sanctuaries hymns were sung to harp accompaniment
(
Amos v. 23),
and in Judah to that of the pipe
and flute
(
Isa.
xxx. 29.
After the return there were
temple-singers
(
Ezra ii. 41)
who sang such lyrics as
are preserved in the Psalter, a book which contains
also purely individualistic hymns (xii. 1 sqq., xvii.
12 sqq., xviii. 18 sqq., xx. 7 sqq.). From
Jer. xlv. 3,
which sounds like a citation, and from Lamentations,
especially chap. iii., the conclusion may be
drawn that the religious lyric was well developed
long before the
Exile. But religious poetry found
a yet wider field, for the style of the prophets is so
decidedly rhythmical that rhetoric immediately
glides over into poetry. No doubt this was an
inheritance from ancient prophecy, which was
accompanied by music
(
I Sam. x. 5;
II Kings iii. 15;
of. Ps. xhx. 4). The teachers of wisdom could
not dispense with poetry, hence the proverb is
expressed in gnomic form with its parables and
rhythm; even
Ecclesiastes, though ordinarily col
orless and devoid of music, now and then glides
into rhythm
(
Eccles. iii.. 1-8, xii. 1-1),
and the
author of the Book of Job has handled a religio
philosophical problem in such a way that he would
have been one of humanity's greatest poets had not
the theologian in him dominated the poet.
Thus it appears that any presentation of Hebrew
poetry is limited to the religious literature of the Old
Testament, and the results would have to be modified were secular poetry as plentifully
preserved
as is the religious. Consequently a definite answer
can not be given to the question
4. The Epic whether or not the Hebrews had a
and the drama; only this may be said, that
Drama none has been preserved, for the Song
Lacking. of Solomon, if rightly understood, is
not a drama, and Job
is a collection of
monologues and dialogues held together by nar
rative. Still, from all this the inference is not,
necessary that the Israelites in their secular poetry
had no drama, but the salient characteristic of
Semitic poetry makes the knowledge of the dramatic
art among the Hebrews extremely doubtful. The
same is true of the epic, which is hardly conceivable
in a prophetic atmosphere that as a rule excludes
every mythological element. But since at least one
Semitic people, the Babylonians, had the epic, it
seems likely that Israel, too, had once epic poetry,
and reminiscences or suggestions of such a form are
still found, though they are used merely for decorative purpose
(Job iii. 8, ix. 13;
Pa. lxxiv. 13-14).
But if one understand by epic only hero-stories
in poetic form, then the Hebrews had much of such
poetry. If, now, with this reservation, one would
get a survey of the whole field of Hebrew poetry,
he would find a good aid in the Old Testament
division of this variety of literature into lyric song
and proverb. The lyric ~3ong in the secular field
embraces love-songs, war-songs, and dirges, all of
which are found in the religious area,
g. Forms as given in Pa.; Ex. xv.; Deut. xxxii.;
Mentioned I Sam. ii.; Nahum i.; Hab. iii., and
in the Old Lamentations. As special kinds of
Testament. poetry the Old Testament mentions the
prayer-hymn (Pa. lxxi.1;
Hab. iii. 1,
cf.
Pa. lxxii. 20) and the song of praise (Ps. cxlv.1). The
"proverb" has a far wider range. This is directed
rather to the intellect than to the feeling, is complex, combines apparently heterogeneous elements,
and gives in condensed, often enigmatical, form an
experience or a moral truth (cf.
I Sam. xxiv. 14;
Ezek. xii. 22-23, xviii. 2;
Prov. i. 1, x. 1, xxv. 1);
it is used by the philosopher
(Job xxvii. 1, xxix. 1),
the seer (Nun. xxiii. 7, 18), the allegorizer
(Ezek. xvii. 2, xxiv. 3),
and the mocker
(Isa. xiv. 4;
Mic. ii. 4;
Hab. ii. 6).
The following is the range of the
use of the proverb: (1) in sentences like those just
given, riddles, and dark sayings
(Prov. i. 6);
(2)
it means the riddle proper
(Judges xiv. 12
sqq.;
I Kings x. 1);
(3) it stands for fables
(Judges ix. 7-8;
Il Kings xiv. 9-10); (4) for parables
(II Sam. xii. 1 sqq., xiv. 6
sqq.;
Isa. v. 1 sqq., xxviii. 23
sqq.); (5) for allegories
(Ezek. xvii. 2, xxiv. 3);
(6) for satires and mockeries
(Hab. ii. 6);
(7) for
expressions of wisdom (Pa. xlix.; Prov. i~ix.; Eccles.;
Job); (8) for didactic presentation of history
(Pa. xcv., lxxviii.); (9) and for prophetic literature
(Nun. xii. 8, xxiii. 7, 18;
Dan. v. 12).
But the
line between the lyric and the proverb is not sharply
drawn, and the two overlap and interchange.
Absolute certainties about the artistic form of
Hebrew poetry are very few; still it may be said
that criticism has established the following facts:
(1) Poetry is not satisfied with ordi6. Charac- nary diction, but searches for sonorous,
teristics of rare, ancient expressions; it often uses
Hebrew a different relative, longer pronominal
Poetry. suffixes, different nominal endings, and
has a preference for alliteration, assonances and word pictures; of a conscious use of
rime for metrical purposes there is no trace.
(2) Owing to its kinship to music and the dance,
poetry demands a form controlled by rhythm. But
here is the least known area, for, whereas the Arabs
had a developed meter long before they knew how
to write, the Old Testament poetry takes such form
that many have given up all hope of finding a meter
at all, in the place of which they discover merely
the " thought-rhythm," the so-called " parallelism
of members." The simplest form of this is the
synonymous parallelism, in which the second part
of the line or verse repeats in different form the
sense of the first (Pa. ii. 4;
Job vi. 8;
Isa. v. 7;
Song of Sol. viii. 6); at times only a part of the
first line is repeated
(Job iii. 8),
or the picture is
followed by the fact
(Prov. ii. 22;
Job vii. 9);
at times the two members bear the same relation to
each other as the obverse and the reverse of a coin
(Song of Sol. vii. 10). A second form is known as
the antithetical, in which the sense of the two members is opposed (Pa. xviii. 27;
Prov. xi. 1).
Besides
these two varieties, Lowth names a third, the synthetic, in which the members merely hang together
without being parallel or antithetic (cf. Pa. iii. 2,
xi.
3, xxix. 1;
Job xiii. 16, xxxiii. 29;
Prov. ii. 31;
Ex. xv. 16).
Ordinarily the parallelism has two
members, at times three (Song of Sol. iv. 10;
Ps. ii. 2, vi. 6, liv. 3),
four (Ps. cxiv. 1-2;
Deut. xxxii. 11;
Judges v. 4, 14),
and even as many as six (Lam. i.1).
(3) Altogether different is the problem, however, if
the search is for the resolution of Hebrew poetry
into a true rhythm and if parallelism is regarded
merely as a frequent accompaniment. Merx, for
example, sees in parallelism merely a rhetorical law
which may accompany, but does not constitute, the
poetic form, and Grimme goes so far as to deduce
parallelism directly from the rhythm. Here appears
the question often affirmatively answered, and as
frequently answered in the negative, whether or
not a meter can be pointed out in Hebrew poetry.
The assertion that the Israelites had a verse measure
is old. Josephus says that Moses wrote two poems
in hexameter (Ex. xv.; Deut. xxxii.), and David
some in trimeters, and others in pentameter.
Similar claims are found in Eusebius and Jerome;
and the latter discovers in Job the hexameter, in
Lam. i., ii., iv., the Sapphic measure, and in Lam. iii.
the trimeter. It must be remembered, however,
that, on the one hand, these authors were endeavoring to remove the prejudice of their readers against
the Hebrew, and, on the other, that only by comparing the Hebrew with the Greek could they make
Hebrew poetry intelligible; nevertheless their testimony, especially that of Jerome, is of importance.
It goes without saying that the discovery of a meter
would be a great help to the textual critic and the
exegete, consequently a number of scholars have
set themselves the task of searching for the key to
this mystery. They fall into two groups, the one
of which (represented by Merx, Bickell, Gietmami)
tries to find the same meter as is found in Syriac
poetry, Servian hero-tales, and new Romance poetry
where the rhythm is produced by a definite number
of syllables. Bickell, the ablest champion of this
theory, claims that in the verse every other syllable
is accented, and that in the foot the accent always
falls on the penultimate; consequently, that in
verses of even number of syllables the measure
would be trochaic, in those of uneven number,
iambic; and he has formulated a complete system
of rules, in accordance with which different syllables
may at times be dropped, the half-vowels counted
or omitted, the suffixes changed, and so on. The
other group (Ley, Neteler, Briggs, Grimme, Duhm,
Bertholet, Gunkel) counts only the tone-beat,
regarding the unaccented and slightly accented
syllables between the tone-beats as unessential to
the meter. Ley has found hexameters, octameters,
decameters, and elegiac pentameters, which may
be divided into smaller parts and interchange with
one another: Grimme, however, has his strophes
consist of from two to four verses with from two to
five tone-beats, but thinks that the verses must
have the same measure; consequently verses of
four beats and three beats, or of four and five beats,
are not interchangeable, while those of four may
interchange with verses of two beats, and verses
with five beats (2+3) interchange with verses
of two and three beats. In general agreement with
this scheme are the conclusions of the exhaustive
investigation of Sievers, who found, however, a
definite rhythm, fitted both for song and recitation,
the so-called pseudo-anapest meter. But too much
caution can not be exercised in judgment of these
systems, for in all there are admitted difficulties.
Every system of metrics rests not only upon laws,
but upon incalculable quantities, which no acuteness
can discover where every tradition is wanting. But
difficulty attends search for the laws of expression, inasmuch as the original pronunciation is no
longer certainly known. Moreover, the text is by no
means certain; in places it is demonstrably corrupt.
Another difficulty is found in the uncertain boundaries of Hebrew poetry. The Masoretes have furnished only Psalms, Proverbs, and Job with poetical
accentuation; but this is decidedly erroneous, since
other books contain poetry. In different compositions different forms may be expected, as, for
instance, in the recited speech and the chanted song;
and while it is undoubtedly true that most prophecy contains true poetry, it is hardly conceivable
that the authors felt themselves bound to any particular meter. Bickell is able to remove all of these
objections by citing Syriac analogies, but proof is
entirely lacking that the Hebrews had the same
method of making poetry as the Syrians. Moreover,
Bickell is forced to ignore the Masoretic notations,
and his system is absolutely irreconcilable with
Josephus's and Jerome's statements. More probable
is the other system, though Ley and Grimme with
their rules go far beyond recognized knowledge. In
favor of this system there are strong reasons: in
the first place, the Masoretic accentuations can be
utilized; in the second place, good results are obtainable in spite of a doubtful text; and it is hardly
to be denied that double verses of three plus three
tone-beats occur so frequently that they may be
conceived as governing the normal meter of the
Israelites; and besides, the system harmonizes with
the statements of Josephus and Jerome. To this
it must be added that there are remarkable analogies
in Babylonian literature Another form of Hebrew
poetry, the so-called Vinah or dirge-meter, has
been richly illuminated through the investigations
of Budde. This is a common line followed by a
shorter broken one, usually three tone-beats followed by two, in which Ley and Grimme see lines
of five tone-beats
(
Amos v. 2;
Ezek. xix. 2;
Isa. i. 21 sqq., xiv. 4
sqq.; Lam. i.-iv.); this measure
seems most fit to represent the mood of the mourning-women. When this meter is found in such
poems as
Ps. xix. 7,
sqq. Ixv. 5-8, lxxxiv. 1 sq., ci.;
Isa. xxxii. 9-14,
it is to be regarded as merely a
poetic device. (5) Finally the Old Testament has
alphabetical (acrostic) poems, Ps. ix.-x.,
xxv., xxxiv.,
xxxvii., oxi., cxii.,cxix.,cxlv.; Lam. i. iv.;
Prov. xxxi. 10
sqq., and no doubt
Nahum i. 2-ii.
3 (according to Bickell also Ecclus. li.13-20). Among these are
many. variations, from such Psalms as cad. and cxii.,
in which a new letter begins every half-verse,
to
Ps. cxix., where every letter is eight times repeated
as an initial. In some the alphabetical order is
barely visible (Ps. ix. sq.; Nahum i), a fact which
can be due only to faulty transmission; indeed, it
seems that Gunkel and Bickell have been able prac
tically to reconstruct the Nahum passage. These
alphabetical songs tell further that the poets devel
oped the stanza in its unity, and in complexity
carried it at least as far as to the length of sixteen
lines, as in Pa. cxix.; a further development was the
refrain used in Ps. x&i. 5, 11, xiiii. 5, 11,
lit. 9, 17,
lxB%. 3, 7, 19; also in the Prophets,
Amos i. 3, 6.
A variation of this is found in the repetition of the
opening verse
(
Isa. v. 8, 11, 18, 22;
Hab. ii. 9, 12, 15).
Considering such facts as these, many students
have followed Kc6ster in supposing that all Old
Testament poetry must be composed of stanzas;
but a difference
of opinion has arisen upon the question
whether single lines (so Sommer, Delitzsch)
or the distich or tristich (so Hupfeld) should be
considered the unit of the stanza. This question
has found an elaborate treatment in D. H. Müller's
Die Propheten
in ihrer ursprunglichen
Form
(Vienna, 1896), but his results appear to be as doubtful as
Bertholet's division of Ezek. xv. and Bickell's and
Duhm's of Job iii.
(F. Buhl.)
Bibliography:
1. From the comparative standpoint 0onsuit: W. Gesenius, Geschichte der
hebraischen S prade and Schrdft, Leipsic, 1815; E. Renan,
Hist. p&t&rala des lanpun
ainitiques, Paris, 1863; B.
Stade, Ernauta prafung des
swrischen dam ph6nisischen and
hebräiwSan Verwan&
schaftaprades, Leipsic, 1875; F. Hommel, Die senitieden
Völker and S prachen, Leipsic, 1883; P. de Lagarde,
Ueberadt über die im Aramduck Arabiaoh and Hebräiech
4bliche Bildung der Nomina,
Göttingen, 1889; W. Wright,
Lacturroa on the Comparative
Grammar of
the Semitic Languages, Cambridge, 1890; J. Barth, Die Nominolbildung
in den semitischen Sprachan, Leipsic, 1894; O. E. Lindberg. Verpleichende GrammaSk der semitischen Sprachen,
Gothenberg, 1898; H. Zimmern, Verpuichende Gram-
der umi&ehen SPrarhan, Berlin, 1898; T. Nöldeke, Die semitisohen Bprachen, Leipsic, 1899.
On the history of the study of the Hebrew language:
H. Ewald and L. Dukes, Beiträge zur OewAidue der dlfssten Auelepung and Spraduerkldrung des A. T., Stuttgart,
1844; H. Hupfeld, De rei gramnwtiea
aped judasos inigis
antiquissimisqw eaipOribua,
Halle. 1846; L. Geiger, Das
Studium der hebräischen Sprache in Deutschland, Breslau,
1870; A. Berliner, Beiträge zur hebr*iacTwa Gramemetik in
Talmud and Midreach, Berlin, 1879; 13. Baer and H. L.
Struck, Dikduke ha-teamim des Ben Ascher, Leipsic, 1879;
W. Basher, Die hebritische Sprachwissenschaft room 10. bi,
sum IB. Jahrhundert, Leipsic, 1892; idem, Die An/d»pe
der hebräiachon Grammatik ib. 1895; E. Nestle, Marpinalien undMateriakn, Tübingen, 1893 Grammars and
lexicons are by: W. Gesenius, Hebräie&e Grammatik,
Leipsic, 1813, 26th ed. by E. Kautaacb,1902, Eng. trenel.,
Edinburgh, 1880; idem, Ausfflhrlidtes prammatiach-kritisrhea Lehr9eb4ude der hobrdischen Spraauis, ib. 1817;
idem, Thesaurus philologiew mitieus lingua hebraxa . .
V. T.,ib. 1835-58; J. Oleheueen, Lebrbuch der hebräischen
Sprache, Brunswick, 1861; F. BStteher, Aueführliches Lehrbuch der hebräischen Sprarhe, 2 vols., Leipsic, 1866-e8; H.
Ewald Lelwburd
der habraieclwn Smache, Göttingen, 1870,
Eng. transl., Edinburgh, 1879; B. 13tade, Lehrbuch der
hebräischen Grammatik Leipsic, 1879; E. König, Lehrpebdude der hebräiaden Sprache, ib. 1881-97; A. Mailer,
Outlines of Hebrew Synhx, Edinburgh, 1888; S. R. Driver,
Use of fns Tenon in Hebrew, London, 1892; F. Brown,
S. R. Driver, and C. A. Briggs, A
Hebrew and English
Lexicon of
the O. T., Oxford, 1892-1906; C. Siegfried
and B. Stade,
Hebroiechea Wörterbuch z
um
A. T.,
Leipsic,
1893; A. B.
Davidson,
Hebrew Syntax, Edinburgh, 1896;
J. R. Kennedy,
Hebrew Synonyms,
London, 1898; J. D.
Wijnkoop,
Hebrew
Syntax, ib. 1898. Consult also the
literature under
Masorah.
II. The subject is, of course, to be studied with the
help of the works mentioned in and under
Biblical Introduction,
especially such as Driver,
Introduction. A
very
helpful book is the
Beilage
of E. Kautzseh to his
Heilige
Schrift
des A. T.,
Freiburg, 1896, Eng. transl.,
Outline
of
the
Hitt. of
the O. T.,
London, 1898. The best book in
English, which covers all phases of the subject, is C. A.
Briggs,
The
Study
of Holy
Scripture. New York, 1899.
The subject of the study of the Old Testament as literature
has during the past decade awakened wide interest.
The following are some of the works evoked by this new
movement: The
Bible as
Literature, by various hands,
New York, 1896; S. Leathes, The Claims of the Old Testament
, ib. 1897; I. Abrahams Chapters on Jewish Literature.
ib. 1899; R. Moulton, Literary Study of the
Bible,
Boston, 1899; idem, Short
Introduction to
the Literature
of the
Bible,
ib.
1903; L. Abbott, Life and Literature of
the Hebrews, ib.
1901; J. P. Peters,
Early Hebrew Story,
New York, 1904; M. Dods,
The Bible,
its Origin
and
Nature,.ib. 1905; C. F. Kent, The Origin
and Permanent
Value of the O. T., ib. 1906; idem, The
Student's O
. T.,
vols. i., ii., iv. (the introductions and appendices are
of special value); N. Mann, The
Evolution
of
a Great
Literature, Boston, 1905; J. H. Gardiner.
The Bible
as
English
Literature,
New York, 1906; W. F. Adeney,
How
to
Read the
Bible, New York, 1907. A book not
antiquated is J. Forst,
Geschichte der biblischen Lib
eratur, Leipsic, 1867-70. For a survey of the conservative
literature the reader is' referred to the literature
under
Biblical Criticism,
where the works of Beattie,
Munhall, Green, and Orr are mentioned and do justice
to
the case for the traditional theory of the origin of the
O. T.
III. In addition to the works of Herder and L owth
mentioned in the text, the dissertation of the latter in his
commentary on Isaiah is to be noted. The subject is
usually discussed in the
introduction to the commen
taries on the books which contain poetry, and especially
those on the poetical and prophetical books. For the
English student the beat summary is in C. A. Briggs,
Study
of
Holy
Scripture, chaps. xiv.-xvii., New York,
1899. Consult further on the subject of Hebrew poetry:
Koster, in
TSK,
iv. (1831), 40 sqq.; F. Delitzsch, Zur
Geschichte der fvdischen Poeaie,
Leipsic, 1836; J. G. Wen
rieh,
De7~poeseos Hebraicw . . . indole,
ib.
1843; E. Meier
Die
ForX
der hebräischen Poesie,
Tübingen, 1853; idem,
Geschichte der poetischen National-Literatur, Berlin,
1856;
I. Taylor, Spirit of
Hebrew Poetry,
London, 1861; H.
Ewald,
Dichter des Alten Bundea,
Göttingen, 1868, Eng,
transl.,
Poetical Books of
the O.
T., London, 1880; H.
Steiner,
Ueber hebräische Poesie,
Basel, 1873; Budde, in
TSK,
1874, pp. 747 sqq.;
ZATW, ii
(1882), 1 sqq., 49
sqq., iii (1883), 299 sqq., xi (1891), 234 sqq., xii (1892),
31 sqq., 261 sqq.; A. Werfer,
Die Poeaie der Bibel,
Tübingen, 1875; G. Bickell,
Metrices Biblicce regula.
exemplie
dllustrato,
Innsbruck, 1879; idem, Carmina
V. T. metrics, ib. 1882; idem, in
ZDMG,
1880, pp.
557 sqq.; H.
Gietmann,
De re
metrics Hebroorum, Freiburg,
1879; B. Neteler,
Grundzupe der hebräischen Met
rik der Psalmen, Münster,
1879; W. Wickes, The
Accentuation of the Three
So-called Poetical Books of
the O. T.,
Oxford, 1882; M. Heilprin, The
Historical
Poetry
of
the Ancient Hebrews, 2
vols.. New York, 1879
1880; G. H. Gilbert,
The Poetry
of Job, Chicago, 1889;
H. Hartmann,
Die hebräische Verakunst,
Berlin, 1894; H.
Grimme, in
ZDMG, 1
(1896), 529 sqq.; P. Vetter,
Die
Metrik des Buches
Hiobs, Freiburg, 1897; P. Ruben, in
JQR, xi (1899), 431 sqq.; E. Sievers,
Metrische Studien,
2 vols., Leipsic, 1901-05; O. Hauser,
Die Urform der
Pealmen. Das
erste
Bach des
Psalters
in metriecher Um
schrift and Ueberaetzung, G
roesenhain, 1907; B. Marr,
Altyvdische SPrache, Metrik and Lunartheozophie, part
i.,
Dux, 1907; E. König,
Die Poesie des A. T.,
Leipsic, 1907;
DB, iv.
2-13;
EB, iii.
3793-3804; JE, x. 93-100;
while the files of the
JBL and PSBA
contain very
much that is pertinent, especially in treatment of in
dividual books,
